Hello everyone, I am asking for one or two peoples help in a project I am thinking of doing, I have come to the conclusion that the bible, and many other holy books are copied from other religions. The project that I want to do is compile every single thing that the bible has copied, and what the bible did copy from. I think that this project is similar to looking to see whether or not a patent like yours exists, you can't just look up and see whether or not one thing matches, you have to see if anything matches.

(15-03-2014 01:30 PM)AMkThiest Wrote: Hello everyone, I am asking for one or two peoples help in a project I am thinking of doing, I have come to the conclusion that the bible, and many other holy books are copied from other religions. The project that I want to do is compile every single thing that the bible has copied, and what the bible did copy from. I think that this project is similar to looking to see whether or not a patent like yours exists, you can't just look up and see whether or not one thing matches, you have to see if anything matches.

It wouldn't be difficult to look up Ancient Egyptian mythology and compare it with the bible. The Noah flood is a total rip off of Gilgamesh from ancient Mesopotamia. Had there been copyright laws in ancient times the writers of the bible would have been in court defending themselves. The creation story is similar throughout the world.
Get yourself several good mythology books and you'll find similarities.

This is a little off the subject but I've been curious about some of the verses added to the New Testament in the second and third century and where they came from. The new testament was copied thousands of times with many mistakes for the first four hundred years. Mark v 17-18 (about the snake handlers) was, according to many Biblical scholars, added in the third century. But where did it come from? It sounds Pagan to me. I've looked through some of the ancient Pagan rituals to find a similarity. I'm still looking.

AMkTheist,
There are no verbatim copies of any portion of ancient NE literature in the Bible. The portions that approaches the closest is Psalm 29 which appears to be a hymn to Baal and Psalm 104 which may be a paraphrase of a psalm of Akhenaten to the Sun.

Far more common are copies within the Bible itself, where portions are copied verbatim between books or even within a book. For example, psalm 57 and 108 are essentially identical as are psalm 40 and 70. Look up Jeremiah 10:12-16 and Jeremiah 51:15-19 for another example. 2 Kings 19 and Isaiah 37 are word for word identical.

One of the basic themes of ancient Sumerian mythology was "chaos vs order", (as opposed to "good vs evil"... see "Marduk Slays the Dragon of Chaos"). In Part II of "Good and Evil", the Jewish philosopher / Talmud scholar Martin Buber explains how that theme is really what the "garden myth" in Genesis is all about. It fits your thesis, perfectly. It's where they got Genesis from, and changed it a little.

Insufferable know-it-all. God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.

The "Golden Rule" -- an "ethics of reciprocity" -- dates back at least to the Buddha, some 500 years or so before xtianity. The Buddha laid such an ethics out in far greater and more eloquent detail in the Veludvareyya Sutta (Discourse to the People of Bamboo Gate) of the Samyutta Nikaya (Connected Discourses).

Spoilered for length:

Veludvareyya Sutta, Discourse to the People of Bamboo Gate

S 55.7

"I will teach you, householders, a Dhamma exposition applicable to oneself. Listen to that and attend closely, I will speak."

"Yes, sir," those brahmin householders of Bamboo Gate replied. The Blessed One said this:

"What, householders, is the Dhamma exposition applicable to oneself?

Here, householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'I am one who wishes to live, who does not wish to die; I desire happiness and am averse to suffering. Since I am one who wishes to live, who does not wish to die; who desires happiness and is averse to suffering; if someone were to take my life, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to take the life of another -- of one who wishes to live, who does not wish to die, who desires happiness and is averse to suffering--that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from the destruction of life, exhorts others to abstain from the destruction of life, and speaks in praise of abstinence from the destruction of life. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to take from me what I have not given, that is, to commit theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to take from another what he has not given, that is, to commit theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from taking what is not given, exhorts others to abstain from taking what is not given, and speaks in praise of abstinence from taking what is not given. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to commit adultery with my wives, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to commit adultery with the wives of another, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from sexual misconduct, exhorts others to abstain from sexual misconduct, and speaks in praise of abstinence from sexual misconduct. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to damage my welfare with false speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to damage the welfare of another with false speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from false speech, exhorts others to abstain from false speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from false speech. Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to divide me from my friends by divisive speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to divide another from his friends by divisive speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from divisive speech, exhorts others to abstain from divisive speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from divisive speech. ' Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to address me with harsh speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to address another with harsh speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from harsh speech, exhorts others to abstain from harsh speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from harsh speech. ' Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects.

"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'If someone were to address me with frivolous speech and idle chatter, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to address another with frivolous speech and idle chatter, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from idle chatter, exhorts others to abstain from idle chatter, and speaks in praise of abstinence from idle chatter. Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects."